Can we have an honest conversation about "Outfits?"

[RoseofGilead.8907]

@"Ardid.7203" said:So, outfits don't require transmutation charges. But the only reason to save transmutation charges is to use them in armor to personalize it and make it unique.What is the point of saving transmutation charges if you are never going to use them? I don't get this reasoning...

In my case, I use outfits on my non-80 characters because then I'm not having to use up transmutation charges to make their new armor pieces match the rest (which, for me, is a must because Fashion Wars). So, I'm saving them up until they hit 80, get them "permanent" gear, and then use the wardrobe to put on different armor skins.

[Danikat.8537]

@RoseofGilead.8907 said:

@"Ardid.7203" said:So, outfits don't require transmutation charges. But the only reason to save transmutation charges is to use them in armor to personalize it and make it unique.What is the point of saving transmutation charges if you are never going to use them? I don't get this reasoning...

In my case, I use outfits on my non-80 characters because then I'm not having to use up transmutation charges to make their new armor pieces match the rest (which, for me, is a must because Fashion Wars). So, I'm saving them up until they hit 80, get them "permanent" gear, and then use the wardrobe to put on different armor skins.

This.

Another option is to use them in different situations, or for role-playing. When Season 2 came out a lot of people complained that their character looked absurdly out of place in the Party Politics instance (where you're interrogating people during a posh party in Divinity's Reach) and even if you're willing to transmute your armour there's not many options - the best I could do with medium armour on a female character was the Whispers coat. But there's plenty of outfits which look appropriate. Not that I think anyone would buy an outfit just for one instance, that would be even more extreme than transmuting your armour, but it's an example of a situation where someone might want the ability to quickly switch to a different look, one they can't get using their armour.

[tacticalevilnoodlefox.5694]

@Hyper Cutter.9376 said:

Good news, you can convert the clothing tonics to outfits now.

Yes. Yes you can.

But I would also like to see new outfits in that vain.

[cadmiumgreen.8712]

@RoseofGilead.8907 said:

@Laila Lightness.8742 said:Outfits are bad for breaks immersion a heavy amored warrior should not have defense if wearing a dress

So, the mini skirt, garter belt, and high heeled boots on the heavy Phalanx set are going to protect the wearer?

To build upon Rose's point, characters are erupting in blue fire, orbited by bats, eternally beneath their personal snow storms, glowing unnatural colors, are tainted by the touch of Mordremoth, and have bees spontaneously generated from their very flesh, and a heavy armor class in an evening dress is bad for immersion? It's really, really hard to claim any one thing in GW2 needs to go because it so very badly breaks immersion when so very, very much takes high explosives to it, shattering immersion into glittery shards that Anet then collects in order to make a mount skin. We're shooting screaming unicorns from bows, riding glitter pooping rock wolves, and floating down from above suspended by spectral chickens.

[Just a flesh wound.3589]

@Ardid.7203 said:So, outfits don't require transmutation charges. But the only reason to save transmutation charges is to use them in armor to personalize it and make it unique.What is the point of saving transmutation charges if you are never going to use them? I don't get this reasoning...

I have about 200 T charges and 15 level 80s. That comes out to 13 T charges per level 80. A full redo of a char’s look will take at least 10 to 11 T charges. This means I can afford to redo each char’s look once and then I have to get more charges. I need to be careful of my T charges if I don’t want to spend my play time farming them. Outfits allow a way to change my look easily, frequently and T charge free. A way I can’t do with armor and not run out of T charges.

[Nuka Cola.8520]

Outfits should be exclusive to Eventful skins, such as Grenth, etc. Armors should be armors, because that's how an rpg works, you have a thing called ARMORS. How fucking stupid does it sound to you if i were to say that your next new armor set(s) will only be available in the next expansion that is 2+ years from release. What kind of mmo gets no armor sets in a span of 24+ months?

Your idea is laughable, Anet.

[TheOrlyFactor.8341]

@Nuka Cola.8520 said:What kind of mmo gets no armor sets in a span of 24+ months?

Except Path of Fire came out with new armor sets and Path of Fire came out a little more than six months ago so... ¯\(ツ)/¯

[Illconceived Was Na.9781]

@"Lonami.2987" said:most outfits could be transformed into armor easily.This contradicts what the developers have stated.

I think ArenaNet needs to move to a custom wardrobe system, where you design your own outfits, merging both skins and outfits for good. Let me elaborate:Ignoring the expense of create such a system and the change in revenue model it would require, "design your own outfit" doesn't affect the fact that outfits are cheaper to produce (in fact it implicitly supports the concept). Custom outfits, in and of themselves, aren't new armor skins.

• Helms, shoulders, gloves, and boots can be combined freely, with no restrictions.This requires updating all helms, shoulders, and gloves to work together, across the current weights.

• Some pieces can cover multiple slots. We already see this ingame with some chests that hide your shoulders automatically. This approach will be applied for outfits that have single pieces that can't be split for mix and matching, like some of the dresses.This isn't quite correct: some pieces appear to cover multiple slots; that doesn't mean that the skins themselves are designed to do so. That's another expense to retrofit existing designs.

• Anyone can use any skin from any weight. You can have a necromancer wearing heavy armor skins if that's what you want.Another major design expense.

• Some helm skins can be combined, letting you wear a hat with sunglasses.That requires designing new skins where these things are actually combined or inventing a new system that separates out headgear into multiple components. I like the idea a lot, but it's going to be expensive and require retrofitting existing pieces to work that way.

• Hairstyles become part of this system as well. You need to buy each hairstyle before using it, just like a skin. Self-style hair kits would become hairstyle unlocks, and permanent hair stylist contracts would become permanent total makeover kit contracts.This distracts from the concept for me. Although I suppose it fits in with the idea that headgear is two or more components, as you suggested earlier.

This is the best solution for the future, in my opinion.If it were free to implement any system we wanted, then maybe it would be "best" (at least for some people). Given the number of mechanics/system/database changes this would require means that the cost:benefit is very steep. So it might not be the "best" option to implement.

[Leo G.4501]

@Nuka Cola.8520 said:Outfits should be exclusive to Eventful skins, such as Grenth, etc. Armors should be armors, because that's how an rpg works, you have a thing called ARMORS. How kitten stupid does it sound to you if i were to say that your next new armor set(s) will only be available in the next expansion that is 2+ years from release. What kind of mmo gets no armor sets in a span of 24+ months?

Your idea is laughable, Anet.

It's a pretty entitled point, and a false one.

As for RPGs and how they work, it varies. Blade and Soul is a competative MMORPG with GW2 and it doesn't have armor (they have soul shields, belts, souls and pets...). I'm sure there are other examples but linking cosmetic looks with stats is a problem, in and of itself, that should have been quashed at the game's inception if cosmetics were going to be its end-game.

[Nuka Cola.8520]

@TheOrlyFactor.8341 said:

@Nuka Cola.8520 said:What kind of mmo gets no armor sets in a span of 24+ months?

Except Path of Fire came out with new armor sets and Path of Fire came out a little more than six months ago so... ¯\

(ツ)

/¯

Yea, but before that, how many armors did you get? Not to mention that your six months is a boatload of time without a single armor set.

[TheOrlyFactor.8341]

@Nuka Cola.8520 said:

@TheOrlyFactor.8341 said:

@Nuka Cola.8520 said:What kind of mmo gets no armor sets in a span of 24+ months?

Except Path of Fire came out with new armor sets and Path of Fire came out a little more than six months ago so... ¯\

(ツ)

/¯

Yea, but before that, how many armors did you get? Not to mention that your six months is a boatload of time without a single armor set.

I provide evidence to counter your claim and you move the goal post. I'm not surprised.

I'm done here.

[Lonami.2987]

@Nuka Cola.8520 said:Outfits should be exclusive to Eventful skins, such as Grenth, etc. Armors should be armors, because that's how an rpg works, you have a thing called ARMORS.

Agree, many of the outfits are just armor sets disguised as outfits.

Outfits should be for single-piece dresses and such, the kind of things that can't be regular armor sets.

@Illconceived Was Na.9781 said:

@"Lonami.2987" said:most outfits could be transformed into armor easily.This contradicts what the developers have stated.

I think ArenaNet needs to move to a custom wardrobe system,

where you design your own outfits

, merging both skins and outfits for good. Let me elaborate:Ignoring the expense of create such a system and the change in revenue model it would require, "design your own outfit" doesn't affect the fact that outfits are cheaper to produce (in fact it implicitly supports the concept). Custom outfits, in and of themselves, aren't new armor skins.

• Helms, shoulders, gloves, and boots can be combined freely, with no restrictions.This requires updating all helms, shoulders, and gloves to work together, across the current weights.

• Some pieces can cover multiple slots. We already see this ingame with some chests that hide your shoulders automatically. This approach will be applied for outfits that have single pieces that can't be split for mix and matching, like some of the dresses.This isn't quite correct: some pieces appear to cover multiple slots; that doesn't mean that the skins themselves are designed to do so. That's another expense to retrofit existing designs.

• Anyone can use any skin from any weight. You can have a necromancer wearing heavy armor skins if that's what you want.Another major design expense.

• Some helm skins can be combined, letting you wear a hat with sunglasses.That requires designing new skins where these things are actually combined or inventing a new system that separates out headgear into multiple components. I like the idea a lot, but it's going to be expensive and require retrofitting existing pieces to work that way.

• Hairstyles become part of this system as well. You need to buy each hairstyle before using it, just like a skin. Self-style hair kits would become hairstyle unlocks, and permanent hair stylist contracts would become permanent total makeover kit contracts.This distracts from the concept for me. Although I suppose it fits in with the idea that headgear is two or more components, as you suggested earlier.

This is the best solution for the future, in my opinion.If it were free to implement any system we wanted, then maybe it would be "best" (at least for some people). Given the number of mechanics/system/database changes this would require means that the cost:benefit is very steep. So it might not be the "best" option to implement.

Why do you quote every line one by one? Just use bullet points, it's easier to read and reply to, and takes less work.

• The developers don't always tell the truth, they have to defend their business interests. That's why you have things like Glint's masks in three different colors sold separately, instead of one that can be dyed with any color you want.
• Helms, shoulders, gloves, and boots require no upgrade to work together across weights, they use the same model foundation. Only chests and legs have a different setup.
• Any skin can be combined with each other, it's always been possible. They all fit together well, except chests and legs which might clip horribly when combining different weights. Was doable for a long time in the preview panel, before they blocked it. You can stack skins perfectly too. There's no expense and no cost here, they only need to place some restrictions to avoid ugly broken combinations, and even that's a design decision, not a technical problem.
• Most of your "expenses" are just excuses, and cheap ones for that matter. You should dedicate some time to learn 3D basics, you would be surprised with many of your previous assumptions.

The proposed system ain't only easy to implement, it would also bring much more money, since it would solve many of the problems with outfits and make them a more attractive product. You should put a bigger effort on making the game better, instead of making constant excuses to keep it stale and unable to grow.

[Manpag.6421]

A lot of the armour customisation arguments are assuming level 80 chars with a bunch of transmutation charges available. I have a reasonable supply of them, but not so many that I want to waste them on levelling gear that I'll use for perhaps 10 levels. Thus, I use outfits so that my characters don't have to wear the rubbishy armour they might otherwise have to endure before they're max level. Anything else would be a waste.

[bigchunk.3875]

If the inquest exo-suit headpiece were an individual skin, I would so buy it. Not sure why they chain outfit skins together to force an all or nothing look. Really reduces the customization I know people (including myself) really like. Anyone know why they do that? Is it more work for them to split the armor pieces up? Seems like the hard part is already done.

@Illconceived Was Na.9781 said:Are you prepared to spend 8-9 times more on armor pieces than on outfits? Do you think that the community overall is willing to do that?

Many would dump money on it yes. Thousands. Never underestimate people's desire to look cool.

[Illconceived Was Na.9781]

@"Lonami.2987" said:Why do you quote every line one by one? Just use bullet points, it's easier to read and reply to, and takes less work.Because it's not easier: you make a lot of different points, some of which are relevant, some of which are based in fact, some in supposition.

• The developers don't always tell the truth, they have to defend their business interests.Of course developers won't necessarily tell us the entire story. But you can't expect people to support your theory on the assumption that they are lying either.

That's why you have things like Glint's masks in three different colors sold separately, instead of one that can be dyed with any color you want.The developers telling the truth or not have nothing to do with whether Glint's mask gets sold in three different colors or not. All we know is that Glint's Gaze Mask is available in three colors. We don't know why and you & I certainly don't know better than the devs why it's so.

• Helms, shoulders, gloves, and boots require no upgrade to work together across weights, they use the same model foundation. Only chests and legs have a different setup.Paste that as often as you like; it doesn't make it true. Even if they use the same model foundation, it doesn't mean that individual skins have been designed or tested to work those of different weights. It might be less work (even a lot less); that's not the same as "no upgrade work" as you assert.

• Any skin can be combined with each other, it's always been possible.If you mean there's no technical reason preventing it, that seem likely (although we can't know that either).

They all fit together well, except chests and legs which might clip horribly when combining different weights. Was doable for a long time in the preview panel, before they blocked it. You can stack skins perfectly too. There's no expense and no cost here, they only need to place some restrictions to avoid ugly broken combinations, and even that's a design decision, not a technical problem.Whether it's a design or technical problem doesn't change whether work is required. You don't get decide (nor do I) what's appropriate to the game.

• Most of your "expenses" are just excuses, and cheap ones for that matter. You should dedicate some time to learn 3D basics, you would be surprised with many of your previous assumptions.Ok this is where going point-by-point would strengthen your case. This is just glib way of phrasing, "I know I'm right" rather than actually supporting your argument. I've gone by what the developers have posted and what other modelers have said; you just keep posting what makes sense to you.

The proposed system ain't only easy to implement,You simply cannot assert that as a fact. You don't work at ANet; you can only guess at best at the expenses involved.

it would also bring much more money,And you really can't assert that — you seem to know something of software development, but you trust in a "customer is always more knowledgeable" paradigm suggests you haven't had to make the sorts of tough decisions about pricing (and design costs) that are necessary to run an enterprise business.

since it would solve many of the problems with outfits and make them a more attractive product.It address some issues. It makes some things more attractive. But that's only part of a business model; it ignores expense.

You should put a bigger effort on making the game better, instead of making constant excuses to keep it stale and unable to grow.Nothing I say in the forums is going keep the game stale or unable to grow. ANet isn't going to reject a proposal because one of us says, "hey you guys told us in 2015 it was too expensive." They are going to make decisions based on what helps the game to thrive, including sometimes reconsidering previously rejected ideas.

If you read more thoughtfully, you'd see I'm pointing out how assumptions about cost and benefit that undermine your own proposal. If you want the game to grow, maybe you should put more time in understanding ANet's point of view, so you can address their goals and concerns better.

[Hyper Cutter.9376]

@Nuka Cola.8520 said:

@TheOrlyFactor.8341 said:

@Nuka Cola.8520 said:What kind of mmo gets no armor sets in a span of 24+ months?

Except Path of Fire came out with new armor sets and Path of Fire came out a little more than six months ago so... ¯\

(ツ)

/¯

Yea, but before that, how many armors did you get? Not to mention that your six months is a boatload of time without a single armor set.Yeah, there were next to no in-game armor skins released for the first few years of GW2, and no full sets (just standalone pieces, mostly as living story achievement rewards). The full sets were all in the gem store. People were really unhappy with this, which is part of the reason Anet switched to their current model.

[Nuka Cola.8520]

The next armor set will be availabe in 21 months. Have a nice wait.

Only in gw2.

[Dawnpainterz.3914]

@TheOrlyFactor.8341 said:

@"DawnSketch.7105" said:I'd much rather pay a little more and get both an outfit and an unlock of all the pieces as skins.

You say this but as soon as Anet does introduce something like this people cry and complain about the price point. I'm convinced the same thing would happen with an outfit with unlockable piece skins. I mean, look at the latest batch of adoptable mount skins. There's an option to get the mount skin you want but that thread exploded in people whining about how 1200 gems was "too much".

Dude, I buy 8k gems every month! It's safe to say that no matter what they price it at I'll buy it regardless.

[Lazze.9870]

@Leo G.4501 said:

@Lazze.9870 said:

@Leo G.4501 said:And I think outfits are plenty creative. Are they the level of personal custom character creation as the likes of perhaps City of Heroes? No, it never was, but for what it's for (making a great looking character), it works, IMO.

Plenty creative how? Because of its four dye slots?

Plenty creative on the developer's side. That is, they can be more creative when making them rather than designing inside of the box that armor pieces forces them to design around.

You know what game you're playing, right? A game where you'd normaly have six armor pieces all seperately dyeable.

When the majority of those 6 pieces look bad or the same as dozens of other pieces for that slot, what creativity are you talking about?

Outfits gimps the fashion potential of this game, the ONLY two arguments for outfits worth anything in this debate is the fact that it's easier for Anet to make them and sell them, and they give players an option for an alternative look to switch forth and back between without transmuting or changing the armor.

How about that the outfits look more polished, detailed and varied compared to a set of armor?

That being said, the worst offense with this new dervish outfit is how the bones literally stick to and stretch with the cloths of the outfit. In the original game, those bones behaved independently. How can they make an outfit look worse in a sequel 11 years after the original was made.

It's a good question. None of it relates to outfits, but gear design as a whole in GW2. Personally, I'd prefer they focus on making races varied and interesting and let us put outfits on them rather than trying to design more intricate armor sets that ultimately come off as overly designed. Again, if this were FFXIV where they have fewer race body types to fit armor on, they could likely make amazing looking sets. But we don't and they can't.

The box that forces them how to design is a box they have put themselves into. The armor designs in GW2 are generally weak, especially the medium sets, even compared to the first game. Still, there are good armor pieces out there, and they give you a much better variety of looks than any of the outfits do. You simply can't argue the fact that six pieces of armor skins and dyeable slots for all those pieces should give the player more variety and opportunities to be more creative. Besides, your opinion about "polished" outfits are pure subjective. In my opinion, most of them are terrible. The latest edition, this Dervish outfit, is aswell, because they clearly don't pay attention to details (the bones).

For every single armor piece they put out, they add a new combination with any existing armor skin out there. Outfits are just that, a complete new look that may like or may not like. And there is no wonder you find most of the armor skins bad, they have barely added new ones over the course of years now, partly due to focusing on outfits instead.

[Lazze.9870]

@TheOrlyFactor.8341 said:

@Nuka Cola.8520 said:

@TheOrlyFactor.8341 said:

@Nuka Cola.8520 said:What kind of mmo gets no armor sets in a span of 24+ months?

Except Path of Fire came out with new armor sets and Path of Fire came out a little more than six months ago so... ¯\

(ツ)

/¯

Yea, but before that, how many armors did you get? Not to mention that your six months is a boatload of time without a single armor set.

I provide evidence to counter your claim and you move the goal post. I'm not surprised.

I'm done here.

He didn't move the goal post, he said 24+ months. How many months between HoT and PoF?

Exactly. He's spot on.

[Just a flesh wound.3589]

@Lazze.9870 said:

@TheOrlyFactor.8341 said:

@Nuka Cola.8520 said:

@TheOrlyFactor.8341 said:

@Nuka Cola.8520 said:What kind of mmo gets no armor sets in a span of 24+ months?

Except Path of Fire came out with new armor sets and Path of Fire came out a little more than six months ago so... ¯\

(ツ)

/¯

Yea, but before that, how many armors did you get? Not to mention that your six months is a boatload of time without a single armor set.

I provide evidence to counter your claim and you move the goal post. I'm not surprised.

I'm done here.

He didn't move the goal post, he said 24+ months. How many months between HoT and PoF?

Exactly. He's spot on.

Heart of Thorns: October 23 2015Path of Fire: September 22 2017

I count the time between the two expansions as 23 months.

[Liewec.2896]

the usual lazy excuses why outfits can't be converted to Armour:

"They weren't designed to be used with other armour so there would be clipping!":there are plenty of awesome pieces of armour already in the game that clip if used poorly, but looks amazing when used well.

"They were designed as a one piece set so they would have awkward cut off points between chest and legs!":there are plenty of armours already in the game with weird cut of points designed to be used as a set, all can be used extremely well.

"but we want to keep the theme of the different weight classes!":Ironclad Outfit already lets my ele look like a warrior, Witch Outfit already lets my warrior look like an ele.

"They can't be broken apart!"not true, before the wardrobe update all outfits were split into parts.for example Mad King's Outfit was made up of Mad King's Boots, Mad King's Coat, Mad King's Gloves etc,all separate parts had their own icons just like armour does.

CONCLUSIONAllowing outfits to be purchased as both Outfits and Armour would be a colossal treasure trove of cash for Anet, they'd make soooo much money.and it would be a huge boon to the extremely lacking armour choices for players.win win.

[Just a flesh wound.3589]

@"Liewec.2896" said:the usual lazy excuses why outfits can't be converted to Armour:

"They weren't designed to be used with other armour so there would be clipping!":there are plenty of awesome pieces of armour already in the game that clip if used poorly, but looks amazing when used well.

"They were designed as a one piece set so they would have awkward cut off points between chest and legs!":there are plenty of armours already in the game with weird cut of points designed to be used as a set, all can be used extremely well.

"but we want to keep the theme of the different weight classes!":Ironclad Outfit already lets my ele look like a warrior, Witch Outfit already lets my warrior look like an ele.

"They can't be broken apart!"not true, before the wardrobe update all outfits were split into parts.for example Mad King's Outfit was made up of Mad King's Boots, Mad King's Coat, Mad King's Gloves etc,all separate parts had their own icons just like armour does.

CONCLUSIONAllowing outfits to be purchased as both Outfits and Armour would be a colossal treasure trove of cash for Anet, they'd make soooo much money.and it would be a huge boon to the extremely lacking armour choices for players.win win.

The problem is not clipping or that outfits are one piece. The problem is that armor costs about 10 times more to make than outfits and takes far longer to make. The time to make a set of armor for 5 races and 2 sexes is about 9 months and that is not appreciably reduced just because they have an outfit to look at while making the armors.

Various quotes on the subject.

Mike-OBrien-ArenaNetArmor sets are by far the most expensive reward we can make. A full set includes heavy, medium, light, times five races, times two sexes, so it’s like developing 30 sets. It takes nine months to develop. (That’s for a normal armor set — legendary is much longer.) It’s not something we can do for Living World episodes. Individual pieces are good rewards for Living World episodes; full sets are more something for expansion packs.

---

ANet mattpArmor sets are one of (if not actually) the most time expensive things we make for GW2. Each set has an incredible amount of detail and customization, and then has to be fit to very disparate rigs. That’s a big part of why we did the number we did for HoT.

---

Mike-OBrien-ArenaNetYou two answered it for me. It does in fact take about ten times the dev effort to make an armor set as to make an outfit.

---

Regina BArmor is one of the most expensive things in the game to create. Armor is complicated and needs to be created with many considerations in mind, and these considerations may not be easily apparent or describable to fan armor designers. (snip)

---

What this boils down to is that outfits are cheap to make and profitable to sell in the gemstore. Armor is expensive and time consuming to create and is best used as part of expansion rewards. (While ANet did make large numbers of armors in the years they were designing the game they also had a number of temporary people they hired whose contracts ended when the game launched and who no longer work for ANet.)

[coso.9173]

but they DON'T have to make 30 sets of armor each time, they can add things once in a while. new chest armor found on a new map, looks the same for both sexes and all races, only has to be designed ONCE and then adapted to th different body types, wich is much less work than doing 30 times. or a new CHARR chest armor for both sexes, then the other month add a new Sylvari pants for both sexes, etc.

[Just a flesh wound.3589]

@coso.9173 said:but they DON'T have to make 30 sets of armor each time, they can add things once in a while. new chest armor found on a new map, looks the same for both sexes and all races, only has to be designed ONCE and then adapted to th different body types, wich is much less work than doing 30 times. or a new CHARR chest armor for both sexes, then the other month add a new Sylvari pants for both sexes, etc.

They did say

Individual pieces are good rewards for Living World episodes; full sets are more something for expansion packs.

However individual pieces don’t seem to be the same in cost or time to produce. If you look at what they sell in the gemstore they sell boots, gloves, and shoulders. What’s not sold is chest and leg armors. So what we could expect is the 3 cheapest pieces plus backpacks for LS maps with chest and leg armors to be reserved for full sets, with expansions. If they only made something for one race for a LS map then I don’t think that would go over well for players of the other races.